Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. ANTONIO C. DUROHOM

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR Nos. 133066-67 2003-10-01	PEOPLE v. ROMEO H. LAMBID AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
It is settled that the presence of an aggravating circumstance justifies an award for exemplary damages under Article 2230[36] of the Civil Code even in the absence of an allegation of the aggravating circumstance in the Information.[37] The award of exemplary damages should serve to deter other fathers with perverse tendencies and aberrant sexual behavior from preying upon and sexually abusing their daughters.[38] Thus, exemplary damages in the amount of P25,000.00 for each count of rape should be awarded to the victim in view of the presence of the aggravating circumstances of relationship and dwelling.
	GR No. 143124 2003-07-25	PEOPLE v. ANTHONY SANDIG Y ESPAÑOLA AZCUNA, J.
Appellant also claims in his testimony that he was nowhere near the construction site on January 21, 1999, the night the rape is said to have occurred. In fact, he presented before the trial court an entry in the barangay blotter to prove that indeed he was somewhere else hiding from other foes that night. This contention is not tenable. Entries in a police or barangay blotter, although regularly done in the course of the performance of official duty, are not conclusive proof of the truth of such entries, for these are often incomplete and inaccurate. These, therefore, should not be given undue significance or probative value as to the facts stated therein.[26]
	GR Nos. 124830-31 2003-06-27	PEOPLE v. GERARDO 'GERRY' EVINA Y PADUAL CALLEJO, SR., J.
Although the aggravating circumstances in question cannot be appreciated for the purpose of fixing a heavier penalty in this case, they should, however, be considered as bases for the award of exemplary damages, conformably to current jurisprudence.[77]
	GR No. 134525 2003-02-28	PEOPLE v. ALFREDO DELOS SANTOS AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
It cannot be ignored that the appellant committed rape with the aggravating circumstance of dwelling as the crime was committed within the house of the victim. Dwelling is considered as an aggravating circumstance primarily because of the sanctity of privacy the law accords to the human abode.[53] However, because of the failure to state such circumstance in the complaint, the same, though proven, cannot be appreciated. Sections 8 and 9, Rule 110 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, which took effect on December 1, 2000, provides that aggravating as well as qualifying circumstances must be specifically alleged in the information, otherwise they cannot be considered against the accused even if they were proven during the trial. Being favorable to the accused, this rule has to be applied retroactively to this case[54].
	GR No. 142416 2003-02-11	PEOPLE v. FRANCISCO SORONGON YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
Entries in a police blotter, though regularly done in the course of the performance of official duty, are not conclusive proof of the truth of such entries for they are often incomplete and inaccurate. They, therefore, should not be given undue significance or probative value as to the facts stated therein. Blotter entries are merely prima facie proofs of the facts stated therein.[6]